Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:58691
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.54 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4F5689B0.7020709@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2012 23:03:28 +0100
User-Agent: Thunderbird
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Morris <dmgx.michael@gmail.com>
CC: PHP Internals List <internals@lists.php.net>
References: <CAGovj_NYgm0ruAoz7iA_S0fS62YJ+PpzAG+DJEnuRJRKaqkDGg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGovj_NYgm0ruAoz7iA_S0fS62YJ+PpzAG+DJEnuRJRKaqkDGg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Namespace and Parse tags on Include and Require
From: keisial@gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C1ngel_Gonz=E1lez?=)

On 06/03/12 15:45, Michael Morris wrote:
> I have made a wiki account with user name MichaelMorris - I don't
> think I have permissions to submit an RFC as of yet.  I'll post this
> here for now.  I've brought this up before, but can now simplify the
> original proposal since the decision to always have <?= available
> addresses much of the original problem.
>
> These changes apply to include, require, include_once and
> require_once. Two new arguments for these functions are proposed for
> introduction.
>
> (...)
>
> Problems
> The largest problem is with IDE's. There is no current convention to
> warn them that the file is pure PHP.  However, I think this can be
> mitigated by adopting an extension for php include files -- *.pif,
> *.iphp are two possibilities.  The language itself doesn't need to
> give a care about this directly.
Tagless files interpreted as php is the wrong way to go.
I think you should instead propose it as:
* A file included in that mode MUST begin with <?php.
* ?> is forbidden in such mode unless followed by EOF.